Well, If I believed that my methods didn't work I wouldn't believe in them, would I.

Secondly, I can't conclude that "education" is going to fail, considering that I'm an educated teacher . I know, you don't mean school education, but I just had to mention it.

I think we should try the peaceful and realistic methods before resorting to "kicking them all out". If they definitely without a doubt "don't work", a new plan of action would have to be conceived.

I am not going to take responsibiltiy for anything that's out of my control. It's like asking you if you take responsibility for the comet that will crash with Earth in a million years.

If you go around saying that I, who lives in Australia should keep going with the 'education', 'tolerance' and 'diversity' route, and it happens, then you ARE responsible.

This is typical of anti's. They take NO responsibility to what happens, they claim not to be in control, but they keep parroting the same lines, the same speech which is keeping the whole blasted thing going.

I live in a city which has to deal with intolerant muslims, whole suburbs going asian, other suburbs where rape has gone up because of immigration. I have to live in a city which will soon be so foriegn, that I'll be out of place, and I can tell you, the 'diversity' that you have somuch faith in, really doesnt' care about me at all.

I get the impression that you don't really know what its like to live with what WE are talking about.

The real world, and I've travelled it, doesn't conform to liberal ideals. Do yourself a favour and realise, that the world is what it is, not somthing that conforms to your wishes.

Now can you tell me, why it is that ALL and ONLY white nations should go multiracial? Can you tell my why it is that the white race must go?
If you want multiracialism, fine, but can you tell us how this is possible without displacing white people?

Mutliracialism that you seem to support, requires displacement and removal of whites. For mutliracialism to grow in white nations, it must involve an attack demographically against the white race is there, and its eventual removal, which is the ultimate end goal of multiracialism.

All we ask in this thread, is you show how we can have a melting pot, and it not involve the eventual removal of the white race.

Besides, I believe that some mixing of genes is good for the genepool. In Norway for instance, we have a relatively high percentage of people dying of cancer compared to other countries. This is despite the fact that we have good healthcare and most live in sanitary and healthy conditions. My theory is that this is a genetical weakness, just like some races of dogs have a heart-weakness or trouble with their knees.

I forgot to address this in my previous post. Cancer is in a way a weakness, but very few cancers arise because of inbreeding. I.e. most cancers would not be remedied by further mixing.

Some people are genetically more prone to get cancers and certain ways of living may make you more prone as well. But the main reason we get cancer is that cells in our bodies have become very mutated. These mutations give them long life and makes them in a way 'independent' from the rest of the body. The cells start to multiply and grow by themselves (they do things they are not genetically programmed to do, because of mutations). This is generally an age disease, although there are many exceptions to that rule, because every second of our life a cell is dividing somewhere in our bodies. And every time a cell divides there is a risk of mutations happening during this process. Most mutations get 'fixed' but then there are always some that do not get fixed. This means that throughout our lives the cells in our bodies 'accumulate' mutations. The longer we live, the more 'mutations' will we have accumulated. The more mutations, the higher the risk of getting cancer. This basically means that if something else doesn't kill you, cancer eventually will.

The most likely reason that many of your people are dying from cancer and not something else, is that it's because you have a good health care system, not despite of it. Your people are generally healthy and don't die from other illnesses. But like I said, if nothing else kills you then cancer eventually will. But then it also depends on what type of cancer it is. Some people are genetically more prone to get some types of cancer, but this would only really be a problem in cases of inbreeding. And it is highly unlikely that a large population like the Norwegian one would have problems with inbreeding. And then there are cancers like breast cancer that is largely influenced by lifestyle (and genetically to a point), because a woman is more likely to get cancer if she has never breastfed a child. The reason why breast cancer is so common is because of the types of cells one finds in the breasts of ALL women around the world - cells that have many similar qualities to those of cancer cells (but are not cancer cells).

People are working hard to find cures and preventive measures for cancer, but the fact remains cancer is not just a disease, it is very many different types of diseases, and they're very difficult to tackle.

A large influx of Africans or Asians into Norway would not reduce the cancer frequencies among your white population.

Well, If I believed that my methods didn't work I wouldn't believe in them, would I.

Secondly, I can't conclude that "education" is going to fail, considering that I'm an educated teacher . I know, you don't mean school education, but I just had to mention it.

I think we should try the peaceful and realistic methods before resorting to "kicking them all out". If they definitely without a doubt "don't work", a new plan of action would have to be conceived.

I am not going to take responsibiltiy for anything that's out of my control. It's like asking you if you take responsibility for the comet that will crash with Earth in a million years.

The idea that because I don't want a family of unemployed, unskilled Somalians moving next door to me, don't want Leeroy to rape my daughter or don't want Mohammed to kick the crap out of me, I need educating, is absurd. You assume that the problem lies with me and not the concept of multiculturalism itself, and my perceived problem can be solved by "education". I live on the front line of multiculturalism in the UK and have seen what your social experiment has to offer. I know what the liberals' arguments are, understand them, and I reject them. No amount of education is going to change that.

Come on anti's, its not hard, the answer doesn't have to be vague. This is Stormfront, not rocket science!
Here it is, in case you missed it.

Quote:

"Brainwashed Genocidal Maniacs, obsessed with the ethnic cleansing of the Whites race."

So now here is a chance for you antis to prove us all wrong.

All you have to do is, put forward an argument that does not amount to GENOCIDE, against the White race.

I will give one Rep. point to any anti who can do this, there may also be special mystery prizes for the best attempts.

There are only three competition Rules:

1. Simply saying things like; "I am against beating someone to death just because of their skin colour" will not be accepted because, any sane WN would agree with you. (So that is not classed as a debate or argument)

2. Antis of one nationality cannot say anything that contradicts antis of a different nationality.

For Example:

An American anti cant say; "its OK for Whites to become a minority in the USA but not in Europe", because any European who is against Whites becoming a minority in Europe would be classed as a RACIST, by European antis.

3. All posts must be on topic, ie. no posting about irrelevant subjects in order to avoid saying anything genocidal or racist against Whites.

BTW. Any WNs. who want to join in the fun, and take up The Great Anti Racist Challenge are welcome........ (Note. WNs don't qualify for prizes)

So here is your big chance and GOOD LUCK, to all antis.

You're here because you think you're position is a stronger one, so come on and take this once in a lifetime opportunity to embarrass us on our own forum.

We all KNOW that any white person who wants a white nation, REGARDLESS of that persons nationalility will be called racist. We all KNOW that multiracialism is for some, but ALL white nations. No multiracialist outside of SF has ever said "Australia should be a melting pot, but Europe should be white". Only anti's on SF say it, and seems only to cover thier ass so as not to appear anti white.

Come on anti's, its not hard, the answer doesn't have to be vague. This is Stormfront, not rocket science!
Here it is, in case you missed it.

You're here because you think you're position is a stronger one, so come on and take this once in a lifetime opportunity to embarrass us on our own forum.

We all KNOW that any white person who wants a white nation, REGARDLESS of that persons nationalility will be called racist. We all KNOW that multiracialism is for some, but ALL white nations. No multiracialist outside of SF has ever said "Australia should be a melting pot, but Europe should be white". Only anti's on SF say it, and seems only to cover thier ass so as not to appear anti white.

Tell me, how much experience with 'diversity' have you had up there in Northern Norway?

Who's uninformed now? ...

I once watched an episode of "Home and Away", and there were no non-whites in that episode. Ergo: You obviously don't see ANY 'diversity' in Australia either... (Please note that this was sarcasm)

Yes, we have cultural diversity in my town (Tromso). We have south-east asians, nigerians (prostitutes mostly... unfortunately), pakistani and a LOT of north-african people (my sister even married one) to mention some. The percentages are ofcourse lower than Detroit, USA, but we have them, yes. They are not as rare as you think. What we don't have a lot of around here however is jews, but you don't see me mentioning the jews a lot for that very reason. Most jews in Norway live closer to the capital, Oslo, but numerically, they are very few.

...anyway, this is for Katrin:

Thanks Katrin for another exceptionally lengthy and detailed answer. I will check out the sources you linked to and make up my own mind before jumping to any conclusions though... I guess you understand that.

It would seem that we DO in fact agree on some points, which I find quite interesting. Bear in mind that I have never accused White Nationalists of being racists. Although some possibly are, I've always known the difference. I understand however why some anti-racists would call the WN point of view a racistic one, as it deal with race, which is generally a taboo, no matter what your opinion is on the subject. Even claiming to "prefer a certain race" is often considered racism, even if we're just talking about personal preference with regards to appearance (physical attraction). In that department I'm already guilty as I previously mentioned to prefer white girls

Superiority:

The use of the word "superiority" was not intended to suggest that you are White Supremacists. It was perhaps a bad word to use in the context, but what I meant was genetically "better" in whatever department that is deemed important by the person describing it. Supremacy is in the eye of the beholder I guess (My weirdest quote so far ).

Intelligence Quotient:

I was about to get a bit worked up when you mentioned IQ as a measurement for intelligence, but thankfully you also mentioned that most IQ-tests are designed for whites by whites. Also, a lot of IQ-tests are language-dependent, and a non-native speaker of the test language will score a lot lower because of this. I for instance scored an amazing 155 on a norwegian IQ-test, but "only" 127 on an english IQ-test. The category where my score suffered the most was... surprise surprise... language skills. (I don't know the technical quality of those tests however as they were basically just me having fun on the internet).

Genocide:

The definition of genocide is more complex than I knew, but still, I feel the "real" meaning of the word (at least to my ears) is a bit harsh. Once again, this is language dependent. The meaning of a word is in the eye of the
beholder (that's twice... )

Crime statistics:

Anyway. The crime statistics you showed certainly appears to show that black people are more violent than whites. I do no dispute this is probably true. I only disagree with the WN solution to this, which is often described as simply sending "them" out of the country. I believe we can do much more efficient work with "them" IN the country where we can educate them to become useful members of society instead of gang members and drug dealers. Once again the somewhat idealistic teacher in me kicks in.. but I truly believe it would work, if it was implemented properly into society without being unfair to people; All poor people who are in trouble and in danger of falling into "bad habits" (crime, drugs and so on) should receive help from the government to straighten their lives out, regardless of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, political opinion or religious background.

About TV and mass media:

I agree that interracial relationships ARE seriously over-represented in movies/TV and commercials. However, I also notice that homosexual relationships appear to be much more common in TV-world than they are in real life. This may seem to be propaganda or even promotion, but it may also be the "TV-people's" way of approaching a (fairly) new and somewhat complex subject that has until recently been surrounded by many taboos.

TV has a tendency to exaggerate EVERYTHING. Just watch a common "survival documentary" on Discovery or something, they're like: "Every step he makes can lead to eternal damnation... If he's not careful, he may be swallowed whole within a second... If he falls now, he's gone . . . FOREVER... Do not try this at home!!", and it's a documentary about turtles... maybe angry turtles, but still.

The "art of exaggeration" performed by some mass media may lead people to believe the most amazing things... But it's nothing that a bit of common sense can fix, in most cases.

I do sometimes fear the power of mass-media and its opportunity to control the minds of the "unthinking". If the media in fact IS in the hands of people with a strange political agenda (as a lot on this forum claims), it can become a dangerous weapon indeed. Some people accept everything of what is said on TV because.. well, the guy on TV said it. I think the part about being critical to what you hear and crosscheck information you find strange should be part of the curriculum in all schools. We already teach children to keep in mind that information on the Internet should not always be trusted... why shouldn't the same thing apply for the other mass medias like newspapers and TV? In my opinion, there is no clear distinction in "quality" or trustworthiness between them.

I am a person that even doublecheck numerical facts in documentaries ("did that tank really weigh 40 tons?... Well... whaddaya know, it did"), but most people are not THAT crazy, I hope . However, the promotion of the use of common sense should always be an important part of national education. Instead of the "Listen - Believe - Know" tradition from the old days, we should replace it with "Listen - Consider - Cross reference - Doubt or trust". The reason being that the only information I can personally guarantee 100% (to myself) is the stuff I've experienced first hand. All the rest is always in dispute by someone, especially after the invention of the internet. There's always someone with a webpage, a video for sale, a statistical analysis of known/unknown origin or something else proving the opposite of what you thought you knew. Usually, the evidence for one of the answers is so overwhelming, and the evidence for the strange theory is always shifty and often made up.

Genetical stuff:

I don't feel I know enough about this subject to form an opinion yet. I'll look into it, as well as the sources you provided and see what I can understand from it. I've never been very interested in genes and DNA and that stuff, and I never learned much about it in school. Some things I recognize, like your simplified example about the horses. I don't think it's quite that simple, but I get your point. The mixing of genes between races could be bad and could be good. You claim it's bad, some claim it's good, and I stand in the middle wondering why I didn't pay more attention in biology-class. If I one day "get it", I will get back to you on this point, if you don't mind

Final points:

I'll look into some of the stuff you've mentioned (especially genes), and maybe one day when my economy allows (just finishing my studies these days, and cash is a bit scarce for the moment), I will maybe purchase the books you mentioned as they seem a bit interesting.

From now on and for quite some time, I might not be able to answer very much on the forum, so if you post something and don't get an answer, please don't be offended. I need to concentrate on my studies to pass my final exams in june, and posting long and complicated posts on Stormfront takes too much time for me at this time.

I haven't registered on the forum because I guess WNs dont actually want antiracists joining their forum.

It has been interesting to post here with my views and see what kind of responses I get. I've learned quite a lot about White Nationalists and I've also gotten an opportunity to practice my english

I might come back occasionally... If you'll have me.

To Lord Nelson:

You said:

"Your post was long but I did read it, I even agreed with some of it.
But still waiting for an anti to pass this challenge.
Welcome to Stormfront!"

Thank you for this, and I'm glad you bothered to read my entire post, even though it was maybe a bit too long.

To everyone who wants to read it:

Even though my nickname might annoy some of the regulars on this forum, I didn't know what to call myself so I just had to pick something simple. I feel it's reasonably well describing what I am. No need to be dishonest, right?. I feel it's better that antis say that they're antis instead of trying to "infiltrate" the forum by posting WN opinions, and when they're "accepted", they do some crazy sneak attack with a "U R all Racists" or something silly like that. This was the thread for opposing views, and I posted an opposing view... Thank you, most of you, for not hacking my posts to pieces and instead taking me seriously.

I was a bit offended by Bob Whitaker when he simply copied and pasted his "White mantra" as an answer to my extensive posts that I use a long time and effort to write. I felt it was disrespectful with regards to my effort of trying to be respectful of your views at the same time as I presented my views in a reasonably peaceful fashion. I see a lot of complaints about antis simply calling WN racists and crackpots, but I didn't, and I was angry to see that Mr. Whitaker didn't notice this. If people have nothing useful to add, they don't have to speak at that particular time. I only speak/write when I feel I have something intelligent to add, hence the long posts. Writing a post like this, in a foreign language (trying to keep it understandable for native speakers), and also balancing between being too judgemental and being too soft (once again, in a foreign language) is a difficult business. Every non-english speaker on this forum know this. It takes a lot of time... however: copying and pasting a mantra does not, and does not involve actual thinking. Well, I just had to get that out of my system. I'm not angry anymore, but I just wanted to explain my feelings on the matter.

Katrin, however, was the excellent example of someone that appreciated my efforts to add something to the forum, and she treated me with respect, in spite of our difference in opinion. She showed a similar effort in answering my posts, as I did writing them. I like that, and I tried to treat her with as much respect as she did to me. (It just occured to me that I don't know if Katrin is in fact a woman, but I simply assumed she is as Katrin is a female name. Please correct me if I'm mistaken).

I'll check any answers to this, but I probably won't answer those again. I must study more and write less

I am betting that you don't know much about human nature but at the same time you know the threats of multiculturalism on whites but in your contempt you say nothing about it in your political multicultural interests.

I once watched an episode of "Home and Away", and there were no non-whites in that episode. Ergo: You obviously don't see ANY 'diversity' in Australia either... (Please note that this was sarcasm)

Yes, we have cultural diversity in my town (Tromso). We have south-east asians, nigerians (prostitutes mostly... unfortunately), pakistani and a LOT of north-african people (my sister even married one) to mention some. The percentages are ofcourse lower than Detroit, USA, but we have them, yes. They are not as rare as you think. What we don't have a lot of around here however is jews, but you don't see me mentioning the jews a lot for that very reason. Most jews in Norway live closer to the capital, Oslo, but numerically, they are very few.

and write less

Home and Away? ugh, Neighbours is far better....

ModernAntiRacist, please do us a favour and spend a little extra time on your posts making them shorter. I'm not trying to stifle your argument, but you'll find more people will be able to digest what you have to say, if it isn't so labouriously stated.

You make some good points, and like most differences of opinion, it comes down to people not understanding the other side. It's very easy to come here, with preconcieved ideas as to what we are about, and fire off the standard rebuttals. Having been here for quite a few years, I've heard it all, again and again, and it is hard to get anti's to discuss the REAL issues behind WN, that is, not necessarily the crime statistics, the genetics, but the basics behind a group of people wanting to protect their group.

As a former anti-racist, I'm more than familiar with the other side, as the lines that anti's used here, were lines that I used, and I was quite PRO miscegenation.

Bob's mantra is posted here often, and it really is a crucial argument. It is after all, one of the texts that you'll read here, which is closest to what this board is about. In my opinion, if you can't challenge the mantra, then you have no business opposing White Nationalism, because you're not really going to oppose white nationalism, but rather aspects of white nationalism which you find disagreeable.

Just as one doesn't disprove the exisence of god by finding religion disagreeable, one cannot argue that white nationalism is a flawed morality because they find it disagreeable.

ModernAntiRacist, I direct this question at you, because you might succeed where others have failed, though any anti is welcome to respond.

Why do you think that this Great Anti Racist challenge has gone on for so long, yet no one has satisfactorily risen to the challenge?

What does that tell you?

First I must apologize for my posts getting too long. I tend to get a bit carried away at times

Regarding your question, i think the challenge has gone on for so long because it's a thread asking people to bring forth GOOD arguments. This makes antis post more complex and better answers than the good old "You're all racists.". Also, a challenge is always interesting

Why no one has risen to the challenge is dependant on who's judging (I think several good arguments have been brought forward by some antis on this thread). However, it is defined and judged by the thread starter who probably don't want any antis to "win" with their argument ever. No offense meant to Lord Nelson (Good job at Trafalgar, by the way ), but I don't think he or any other WN will ever accept an anti argument, because they can never agree with the pivotal points of the argument.

It's the same reason that a White Nationalist can never really create a convincing/converting argument for his/her cause that will be "accepted" by antis. We are disagreeing on a fundamental level, and humans are not known to change their minds very often... You said you changed from being a anti to being a WN, and that is interesting as it means you must have been a very open-minded anti (or a push-over, depending on how you look at it).

Maybe I should ask the members to make "The Great White Nationalist challenge" where the goal was to put forward an argument that did NOT amount to racism (by traditional anti definition)... good luck!